Value of: Rick Nash

[sparxx87]

I would take Nash 10 times out of 10 over Patches or JVR.

JVR @ 4.5m > Nash at 7.9m... Disregard the cap and I probably agree with you.

If Nash is traded, the value of the return will hinge on how much salary the Rangers retain. They keep 2m and you'll see a solid return. I can't imagine many teams paying top dollar for an 8m player who produces like a 6m player... But then again, the Subban and Hall trades, I guess anything is possible.

 

[2020 Cup Champions]

Was Brassard a "very good top-6 center" at the time of the trade?

 

[Beacon]

Was Brassard a "very good top-6 center" at the time of the trade?

167 points in 292 career games at the time when he was traded to the Rangers or a little over .57 per game or 47 points per 82 games. Offensively that's easily good enough to be in the top 180 forwards (30 teams times 6 per team). Last year, it would've been 119th among forwards who played 25+ games. That means on average, a guy who gets .57 per game is the 4th leading scorer on the average NHL team, certainly top-6 production. And he's useful all-around too, so he was a legit second liner, even if an unspectacular one when the Rangers got him. Notice that at 25 as a #6 overall draftee, it was still seen as very much possible that Brassard will turn into what he became with the Rangers, which is #48 in total points and #58 in points per game.

If Gaborik could fetch back 3 young players, one of whom was averaging ~50 points per 82 games at the time, plus a 25-year-old Dorsett and a 21-year-old Moore, despite having a $7.5 salary, going through a terrible season, and a history of constant injuries, there's no way Nash is worth zero.

Also, if Sekera ($2.25 cap hit at the time) as a rental is worth a first and a prospect who at the time was just drafted in the second round, how's Nash worth less than that even if the Rangers retain half his salary that drops his hit to $3.9? A team gave up a #1 and essentially a #2 for Sekera for one playoff round, yet they wouldn't give that up for Nash for 2 seasons at half price?

 

[b in vancouver]

JVR @ 4.5m > Nash at 7.9m... Disregard the cap and I probably agree with you.

If Nash is traded, the value of the return will hinge on how much salary the Rangers retain. They keep 2m and you'll see a solid return. I can't imagine many teams paying top dollar for an 8m player who produces like a 6m player... But then again, the Subban and Hall trades, I guess anything is possible.

I'm really not a fan of JVR. Possibly the most inconsistent player in the NHL. People seem to remember his good games and wash over the 10 games where he was invisible. If he wasn't drafted were he was and traded - people would think of him as a lesser version of M. Ryder. I've maintained that he's been a bigger disappointment in Toronto than anyone - but seems to get a free pass.

I like him but unfortunately think Pacioretty might be done. I worry we won't see that dynamic goal-scorer from two years ago again.

I'm not a Rangers fan but Nash's cap hit is off-set by only having two years remaining. Backes, Eriksson, Okposo, Lucic all signed for $6M 5-7 years... I wonder if those teams would've preferred two years at 8.
Even without retention Nash would have value. 1st rounder + prospect. Retention would boost it.

Honestly I'd love him on the Bruins, even at that cap hit. The idea of rolling out...
Marchand - Bergeron - x
Nash - Krejci - x
Beleskey - Backes - x
would probably be the hardest forward group to play against that the league's seen in quite awhile. Who cares about defence when you have that many defensive forwards.

I'd pony up to the Rangers asking price in a heartbeat. (ideally they would retain $1-$1.5M)

 

[Johnsie19]

I'm really not a fan of JVR. Possibly the most inconsistent player in the NHL. People seem to remember his good games and wash over the 10 games where he was invisible. If he wasn't drafted were he was and traded - people would think of him as a lesser version of M. Ryder. I've maintained that he's been a bigger disappointment in Toronto than anyone - but seems to get a free pass.

I like him but unfortunately think Pacioretty might be done. I worry we won't see that dynamic goal-scorer from two years ago again.

I'm not a Rangers fan but Nash's cap hit is off-set by only having two years remaining. Backes, Eriksson, Okposo, Lucic all signed for $6M 5-7 years... I wonder if those teams would've preferred two years at 8.
Even without retention Nash would have value. 1st rounder + prospect. Retention would boost it.

Honestly I'd love him on the Bruins, even at that cap hit. The idea of rolling out...
Marchand - Bergeron - x
Nash - Krejci - x
Beleskey - Backes - x
would probably be the hardest forward group to play against that the league's seen in quite awhile. Who cares about defence when you have that many defensive forwards.

I'd pony up to the Rangers asking price in a heartbeat. (ideally they would retain $1-$1.5M)

Why is Pacioretty done?

 

[b in vancouver]

Why is Pacioretty done?

Just never looked like the same player this year. I hope I'm wrong and that it was just a bad year but just never seemed to have that same stride or separating speed that made him so dangerous. He might get it back but... I'm hesitant.

 

[b in vancouver]

Back on topic.
What would the add-on to Spooner have to be for Nash with $1M retained?

 

[Johnsie19]

Just never looked like the same player this year. I hope I'm wrong and that it was just a bad year but just never seemed to have that same stride or separating speed that made him so dangerous. He might get it back but... I'm hesitant.

hes 27 years old. he slumped with the whole team second half. hell be fine.

 

[Djp]

The problem is... insane statements like these. If you don't know what you are talking about, you don't need to always have an opinion. Nash is one of the top defensive forwards in the league, he's huge, and he scores like a first liner (top-90 forwards overall and per game) even in his bad years. Considering that you don't need to give him a 7-year contract like you would to a first line UFA, he has a great contract. If you sign a UFA first liner, you'll pay just as much, but with 5 extra years that will come on the tail end of the guy's career.

Not only will the Rangers get a first rounder for him, they will REFUSE to trade him for just a first liner, I guarantee you that. They will get much more.

Look at what the Rangers got for Gaborik who was making almost exactly the same (when the cap was lower) and had very similar career stats, BUT had massive injury problems, was in the middle of a worse year than Nash just had, was seen as soft which Nash never is, and was never anywhere close to as good defensively as Nash. The Rangers got a very good top-6 25-year-old center (Brassard), a 4th liner for whom they got a 3rd rounder (Dorsett) and a young top-6 defenseman (Moore). Brassard at the age of 25 and a cheap $3M contract alone is worth far more than a first rounder, not to mention that both Dorsett and Moore had value.

Considering that Gaborik:

1. Earned a greater percentage of the cap than Nash;
2. Had a worse year and a similar offensive career;
3. Was much worse defensively;
4. Not as physical;
5. MUCH more injured;

Nash should bring in more than what Gaborik brought back. The idea that Nash has little to no value is nuts.

I'm not saying Nash sucked. You can't be selling him as if he was 24 vs him now. Value should not be based on what he has done in the past vs what he has done in the future.

Nash and Vsnek have had so miler careers.

He has a ton of wear and tear so it's due to break down given his style of play.

His cap hit seriously hurts his value. The fact is cap hit plays a part.

Comparing Gaborik are apples and oranges. Sure, all it takes is an idiot GM to overpay.

Eric Staal got two seconds and a good prospect.
Sekera got a first and a prospect.
Coburn got a first, a third and a young defenseman.
Frederik Anderson got a first rounder and a second.
Reinhart got a mid-first and a very early second. He then spent half the year in the minors.

Not one of them has anything closely resembling the value of Nash even unretained. The idea on this forum is that Nash at half price is worth less than any of these players is nuts, just absolutely nuts. A huge power forward who plays elite defense is worth more than a first rounder even if he scores zero points, much less if he's consistently among the top NHL scorers.

Players have more value on an expired contract than those with high cap hits after.

Sekeras cap hit was $2.75M UFA
Coburn was at $4.5 M with 1 yr left
Anderson was an RFA (26 yrs old). He is s capable starting goalie and signed starting goalie salary.
Reinhart was a prospect who screamed potential bust. I laughed seeing Edmonto trade a later 1st for him. The likelihood of his success/ failure was equivalent to a player picked there.

Staal....he was traded for too much. He was not worth 2 2nds and a decent prospect. He also had limited who he would go to.

Nash on the other hand is $7.8 M ( higher paid salary) ...a team could get 2 $4M forwards for the same cost.

As a UFA to be he likely gets more value than now....something like a 2nd and 3rd with possibly more with retention. The 2nd could become a condition 1st if the team makes conference final ( thus pick 37-30)

All it takes is one idiot GM under pressure to try and win that season.

 

[NYR713]

I hope Nash stays, especially if this thread is any indication of value that would come back. Last season is in the rear view now. He's going to bounce back offensively this season and his 200ft game is still higher echelon in the league. Nash will score 30+ goals and 65+ points this upcoming season.

Nash isn't the problem. AV's strict man on man defensive system is the main problem holding the team back from current success. It's just a stupid system that no other playoff team was using. Guys like Girardi end up chasing a player out by the blue line while Zuccarello is battling someone in front of the net in the defensive zone and then there is no structure to break out of the zone because everyone is all over the place. Fix that and this team is going back to a deep playoff run.

 

[b in vancouver]

I hope Nash stays, especially if this thread is any indication of value that would come back. Last season is in the rear view now. He's going to bounce back offensively this season and his 200ft game is still higher echelon in the league. Nash will score 30+ goals and 65+ points this upcoming season.

Nash isn't the problem. AV's strict man on man defensive system is the main problem holding the team back from current success. It's just a stupid system that no other playoff team was using. Guys like Girardi end up chasing a player out by the blue line while Zuccarello is battling someone in front of the net in the defensive zone and then there is no structure to break out of the zone because everyone is all over the place. Fix that and this team is going back to a deep playoff run.

I can't speak for everyone but as a Bruins fan - I'd pay the asking price for Nash if New York could retain $1M. Spooner, '17 1st, mid-level prospect or 2nd next year. Something like that would be in the ballpark - value wise anyways.

 

[Dukeordan]

Lunacy, just pure lunacy. If Nash is making $3.9 (50% retained), he's literally the best value in the league of any veteran, bar none. Your "offer" is insane unless by a first rounder, you mean a top-5 pick and the "decent" prospect is a 2015 first rounder who just had a very good last season. Considering that scrub second liners get $6 for 7 years, a top-end first liner like Nash at $3.9 has insane high value, not a #20 plus a guy drafted in the third round.

Nash unretained still has more value than Gaborik when the Rangers traded him for Brassard, Dorsett and Moore.

A little over one year of Yandle at almost $3 cap hit cost the Rangers their best prospect since McDonagh (Duclair), a first rounder, a second rounder and a top-6 defenseman. Nash is easily more valuable than Yandle at a similar salary.





Zero unless he gets permanently injured in a car accident or gets busted for drug dealing.

Wow, just wow! You are either completely clueless about relative value of a 32yr old --with a 8mil cap hit -- or you're the biggest NYR Homer I've ever seen in my entire life!!! You sound more arrogant than a Maple Leaf fan. Where are you coming up with this nonsense Nash is worth a top 5 pick and a top prospect? Not even if he was 23 - 25 years old would Nash be worth that much. Especially not now with his cap hit. I like Rick Nash and think he's w solid 2-way LWer. But you over value him way too much. Your comments actually made me ashamed to be a fan of the NHL. It's fans like you that give the NHL a bad reputation. Just because there are some teams that are stupid enough to over pay for overrated players doesn't mean they all are And just because Minn was dumb enough o make that deal to get rid of Gaborik, had nothing to do with Nash's value!!! My goodness. I would never stoop so low and to ridicule a persons intelligence on the whole, cuz I don't know any of you. But I gotta say, I was pretty close after reading some of your posts on this thread!!! I suppose you think Staal and Girard should fetch a couple first rounders, too? Unreal you Ranger fans and your superiority complex when you guys have one 1 Cup in over 60 years! Must be a NYC thing cuz Yankee and Met fans are just as bad! Do us all a favor and stop posting please. You literally ruined mh day with your arrogant comments.

Hope you this didn't come off as too mean... You just need a reality check!

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

Honest question:

% chance he's exposed next June?

Not much . Would the Vegans want one guy taking up 10% of their cap? Sounds like the Rangers don't.

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

The trouble with Nash and his contract is that any team that may want him would be a contender. And most contenders don't have 7.8m a year in cap space without sending money back to the Rangers (which sort of defeats the purpose of the trade.)
Using logic of Nash's play and his cap situation, there seem to very few places he could be traded too.

Think the Rangers are going to have to ride out their "not so good contracts", because trading away any problems is unlikely.

 

[Idlerlee]

Wow, just wow! You are either completely clueless about relative value of a 32yr old --with a 8mil cap hit -- or you're the biggest NYR Homer I've ever seen in my entire life!!! You sound more arrogant than a Maple Leaf fan. Where are you coming up with this nonsense Nash is worth a top 5 pick and a top prospect? Not even if he was 23 - 25 years old would Nash be worth that much. Especially not now with his cap hit. I like Rick Nash and think he's w solid 2-way LWer. But you over value him way too much. Your comments actually made me ashamed to be a fan of the NHL. It's fans like you that give the NHL a bad reputation. Just because there are some teams that are stupid enough to over pay for overrated players doesn't mean they all are And just because Minn was dumb enough o make that deal to get rid of Gaborik, had nothing to do with Nash's value!!! My goodness. I would never stoop so low and to ridicule a persons intelligence on the whole, cuz I don't know any of you. But I gotta say, I was pretty close after reading some of your posts on this thread!!! I suppose you think Staal and Girard should fetch a couple first rounders, too? Unreal you Ranger fans and your superiority complex when you guys have one 1 Cup in over 60 years! Must be a NYC thing cuz Yankee and Met fans are just as bad! Do us all a favor and stop posting please. You literally ruined mh day with your arrogant comments.

Hope you this didn't come off as too mean... You just need a reality check!

Fans putting a value to their player isn't exactly new, or something that gives the NHL a bad name. If anything you expect fans to overvalue their players, since they're, you know.. their players.

It's not an understatement that Nash is viewed as fairly worthless outside of the Rangers organization by a lot of posters here, especially when they don't take into account that Rangers can retain. And even then, suggesting that he is worth more than their scraps, is supposedly heresy.

Just as demanding a top5 pick and a top end prospect for Nash is probably a bit of an overpayment, going full ham in the other end and claim he's not worth a equal good return with retained $ is equally insulting to NYR fans.

May I suggest that you accept that people value their own players more highly than outsiders would, instead of insulting thousands of people for no good reason.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

The trouble with Nash and his contract is that any team that may want him would be a contender. And most contenders don't have 7.8m a year in cap space without sending money back to the Rangers (which sort of defeats the purpose of the trade.)
Using logic of Nash's play and his cap situation, there seem to very few places he could be traded too.

Think the Rangers are going to have to ride out their "not so good contracts", because trading away any problems is unlikely.

The purpose to trade Nash isn't to get his cap hit off the books

 

[5cotland]

Let's compare here:

Iginla got trade to Pens for a 1st rounder and 2 prospects whilst being 35/36 and with just over a year left in his contract......and his salary was $7m.

How can Rick Nash be so undervalued after 1 poor season? The year before he got 40 goals.

 

[belair]

The purpose to trade Nash isn't to get his cap hit off the books

Then they won't trade him because he's not valuable to the teams he can be traded to at the cap-hit he's at. He's a deadline deal if anything at all.

 

[Doriva]

Then they won't trade him because he's not valuable to the teams he can be traded to at the cap-hit he's at. He's a deadline deal if anything at all.

The purpose isn't getting his cap off the books it's getting young talent back, meaning we can max retain / take a cap dump back meaning we can make his cap hit manageable.

Imo if Nash was going to be traded it would have been at the draft, Rangers are going to have another go with this group this year and most likely end up slamming our heads into the glass ceiling again.

 

[TGWL]

I'm not saying Nash sucked. You can't be selling him as if he was 24 vs him now. Value should not be based on what he has done in the past vs what he has done in the future.

Nash and Vsnek have had so miler careers.

He has a ton of wear and tear so it's due to break down given his style of play.

His cap hit seriously hurts his value. The fact is cap hit plays a part.

Comparing Gaborik are apples and oranges. Sure, all it takes is an idiot GM to overpay.



Players have more value on an expired contract than those with high cap hits after.

Sekeras cap hit was $2.75M UFA
Coburn was at $4.5 M with 1 yr left
Anderson was an RFA (26 yrs old). He is s capable starting goalie and signed starting goalie salary.
Reinhart was a prospect who screamed potential bust. I laughed seeing Edmonto trade a later 1st for him. The likelihood of his success/ failure was equivalent to a player picked there.

Staal....he was traded for too much. He was not worth 2 2nds and a decent prospect. He also had limited who he would go to.

Nash on the other hand is $7.8 M ( higher paid salary) ...a team could get 2 $4M forwards for the same cost.

As a UFA to be he likely gets more value than now....something like a 2nd and 3rd with possibly more with retention. The 2nd could become a condition 1st if the team makes conference final ( thus pick 37-30)

All it takes is one idiot GM under pressure to try and win that season.

I am assuming you meant Vanek, and assuming you meant "similar careers"? Or are you trying to say they have a lot of miles on their career? If it's the former, can you explain how they have had similar careers?